Talk:Lazarus' spaceship
Timeship :Posts from Talk:Timeship added as they happened. While Lazarus claimed his ship was a time ship but there is no evidence it really was. In fact the way Lazarus describes his trip "across all the years, all the empty years to a dead future on a murdered planet he destroyed" could just as easily be due to relativistic space travel. Besides if Kirk really believed him the first thing he should have asked was why didn't Lazarus go back in time and stop his foe. Remember one version of Lazarus is stark raving bonkers. Nevermind Kirk finds out that the ship is in reality a gateway between universes and so Lazarus' claim can be written off as a lie.--BruceGrubb (talk) 20:15, January 14, 2019 (UTC) : His claim was the evidence, and while his definition may not fit your definition, we still should treat it as it is stated because incoming and outgoing links from there to here and so forth are still going to link to words used in the episode and those words say "a time chamber, a time-ship." --Alan (talk) 18:27, February 12, 2019 (UTC) There is not proof that Lazarus's claim that his ship was able to travel through time was true.--BruceGrubb (talk) 18:37, February 12, 2019 (UTC) : Seriously, how many pages are you going to post this on? But to respond, there is no proof that it isn't either. --Alan (talk) 18:41, February 12, 2019 (UTC) ::...and per policy, we require evidence of absence. - (on an unsecure connection) 18:44, February 12, 2019 (UTC) Lazarus also claimed that he came from a planet that Kirk found never existed so Lazarus lies. Also relativistic flight would produce the "across all the years, all the empty years to a dead future on a murdered planet he destroyed." effect Lazarus claimed. It's like the spaceship seen in the 1968 version of Planet of the Apes; just because they went 2000 years into "the" future doesn't make their spacecraft a timeship and the same applies to Lazarus' ship.--BruceGrubb (talk) 18:45, February 12, 2019 (UTC) :Actually, that's the exact reason why a number of these ships are timeships. The Enterprise, the other Enterprise, Defiant, the other Defiant... --Alan (talk) 18:51, February 12, 2019 (UTC) Actually they are timeships because they can travel to or access the past. It is clear Kirk doesn't believe Lazarus from his tone and given what has seen via events in The City on the Edge of Forever (episode) the fact he doesn't point this out shows he doesn't believe Lazarus.--BruceGrubb (talk) 19:56, February 12, 2019 (UTC) :First, why can't you keep your indents, or follow most of our most basic editing rules??! Second, time goes two ways. The Enterprise-C visited the future, as did every other ship that traveled to the past and back again. 1969 --> 2267 is traveling to the future. --Alan (talk) 19:44, February 12, 2019 (UTC) Archduk3: It says no such thing. In fact the very word "absence" does not appear anywhere on the page. The more relevant point is the section "The archivist's assessment of the trustworthiness of the character who is the source of the resource..." Lazarus has lied once and there is nothing to show he hasn't lied again.--BruceGrubb (talk) 19:56, February 12, 2019 (UTC) That is totally nonsense as relativistic transport happens all the time but we don't call the vehicles time machines but cars, planes, rockets, trains, etc. By this insanity the Botany Bay is a timeship because it traveled from the late 1990s to the 23rd century.--BruceGrubb (talk) 19:56, February 12, 2019 (UTC) : I'm no longer dignifying this farce with a response. --Alan (talk) 20:14, February 12, 2019 (UTC)